• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

325 Excellent

1 Follower

About CRJ900

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

10198 profile views

    Having exactly the same thing since release. Both in v3 and v4.2
  2. Will there be an option to swtich between the left and right seat? (basically switching between the animated sidestick). Would really add to the immersion during shared-cockpit ops.
  3. CRJ900ER Lufthansa D-ACNM

    Terrific livery! Very accurate as well, like one would expect from the one and only Holgi! And quite frankly, it doesn't look too bad on the CRJ either.
  4. Lufthansa CityLine D-ACNM Bombardier CRJ-900

    Nice! But please theck the "M" letter in the registration, as it's a bit different in reality and also please remove the warning label from the engines. I'll send you some reference pictures via. DM.
  5. It's not like they are ditching FSX and FSX:SE soon. The new Airbus series (A320 fam and A330) will all be available for FSX and P3D. FSX will only come with less features, most of which is just visual stuff like dynamic lights, rain, more animations etc. Look at the CRJ, that one is for pretty much all ESP-based sims.
  6. Well I have to agree. I've seen and used many FNPT's with horrible flight models that only cover basic stuff (and don't even allow things like sideslips or spins, heck even stalls just drop the nose like a brick wthout any buffet). But they are just that, FNPT's = procedure trainers. Same with Level-D's but those are generally much better in pretty much every aspect. What I am trying to say, even with all those "small" and in depth things there are still fundamentals like energy conservation and management, which most addons in FS simply don't do properly. You can't tell me you can fly a 400+ tonne 747 at like 20° alpha, full toga and get a 2000f/pm climb an NOT stall - we've all seen that video where a 747 stalls and goes out with a bang... Some deveopers who have an external flight model do this very well on the other hand. Stuff like energy conservation, sliding and slipping forces, torque effects, lift changes based on IAS etc. are wery well modelled and let's say, pretty authentic. Some developrs just get it, do it right and do it with passion. Others will simply never get it.
  7. Nice joke. The PMDG 777 has nothing to do with the real 777 behaviour. Period. Autoflight is very clunky, the autothrust is chasing its target like a wet dog is chasing a three-legged cat all the time and on top of that it flies like on rails and has the ground effect of a sailboat. Good friend of mine flies the 777 for a living and we had a longer discussion about the PMDG rendtion once. Yeah, real thing just doesn't behave like that. Systems are alright though, but not the actual flying bit. Also, stop ing comparing your product to the FSL all the time.
  8. HDR light settings, PTA etc etc

    Well, most pilots would wear sunglasses during the day in cruise. Yes it is bright but not as bright as you make it seem. Yes, you can see your feet and anything else in the cockpit (unless you stared at the sun for like 5 minutes of course). I do agree with the lense flare bit, it's just a "photo" feature that is found in AAA games. Some texture addons come with more realistic "flare" effects for the sun, such as a simple glow when you look directly at it, which is a lot more realistic. Envtex for example does this very well. As far as HDR I personally use the recommended settings that come with Envtex and Envshade and in my eyes they look fairly realistic and natural under most conditions. But to be fair, there's only so much you can do in a desktop sim and a 2D environment. Just take a look at DCS, which probably has the most advanced and sophisticated flightsim graphics engine these days - it doesn't look very different in the lighting and sunlight department either. Regarding HDR settings, these work fairly well (of course they need to be adjusted to the personal liking and monitor). Luminosity: 1,25 to 1,35 Bloom: 0,15 to 0,25 Saturation: 1,05 to 1,15 I personally use 1,25 luminosity, 0,15 bloom (I keep this one low as it tends to wash out things and make them glow unnaturally at higher settings) and 1,10 saturation.
  9. What do you mean by "impement that" - this is already correctly implemented.
  10. Because only flaps 1 + F extends the flaps on the ground. If you select flaps 1 in the air only the slats will extend.
  11. I stand corrected then. To me it came across that way based on the words that were used in said statement and on the fact that the "early access" model is pretty popular in the game industry these days. But wasn't the A333 with RR's the initial plan anyway? I absolutely thought Mathijs was refering to the A318/319, which is the next in line. And when is a product ever "done" ? The CRJ surely wasn't done when it got released and it surely still istn't "done", but that's another story...
  12. First of all, this wasn't meant in a negative way of any sort, just some constructive criticism, since you and Mathijs seem to be rambling utter nonsense sometimes (like the initial post Mathijs made after the FSL bus got released, comparing the two and later removing said post). I'm just being honest here. If you feel like this is offensive to you or toxic to this discussion then feel free to remove it. That might be true to some extent but for people who actually study the systems and read up on the manuals this stuff is important and indeed noticeable. For instance one other major part of the S7 DMC software variant is some NAV display symbology/logic, showing you "ILS25L" or "RNP25R" instead of the older "ILS APP" etc. readings, which is great for SA, the ability to do stepclimbs, wind uplink and fly a constant mach .xx number. Regarding the FWC, the FSL will get the latest FWC variant in the next update, which will be neat for SOP practice and ecam drills, agreed. And as you said, even an older CRT EIS1 bus can have pretty up to date software in most areas. Well, I admit this would be pretty new to me. I guess this was added to post A320neo launch A320ceo's at some point, coupled with CPDLC. Any info on what year these airframes were? Like 2016-ish? Not trying to stir up the pot in any way, but simply saying your Airbus is "newer" because of some hardware and software differences, which again, are easily updatable and are even promised by the "other" dev doesn't even add a valid point to the discussion. First do your part and release your Airbus with all the promised features correctly implemented (as advertised) and then we can have a more in-depth talk or dare I say even a comparison. And yes, I know you are just trying to sell your new product on this forum. Also, don't take anything that is written here personally or offensive - text based communications are known to remove a lot from human interaction and can falsify the actual intent/tone of any statement. Anyway, I'll end my rant here and head out to my new year's party! Cheers everyone, happy new year - gonna be a good one for flightsimming for sure!
  13. Except the FSL isn't an older Airbus. It has pretty up to date ELAC, SEC, FAC software and a S4/S7 (full S7 coming with the next update) FMGS version. It's funny how you guys use the same "modern" ACP as on the original Airbus X in the "new" Airbus again and say it's up to date, even if the "LOAD" button/function is only found on the neo's. Having said that, there's really no point to compare the two products as they are aimed at two completely different groups and are withing a very different price range. Simply don't go that way saying your Airbus is "better" in some aspects because you can't compare them. There is no fair comparison of the two. Let's just wait for new previews of the A319/A330 flooding in next year and continue our discussion on this topic. Happy new year everyone!